This study investigates how closely different interviewers agree when ranking the same applicants, and determines the "correctness" of their rating of applicants. Interview data for applicants to a medical school for two recent consecutive years were examined. For the first year, 573 applicants were interviewed; for the second year, 675 were interviewed. Twenty-six physicians were interviewed in the first year, and 38 interviewed in the second year, with 20 interviewed both years. In the first year, 146 pairs of interviewers interviewed the same candidates. In year 2, 73 of the 238 pairs were retained. Results indicated that most interviewers were both reliable and "correct" or valid. Interviewers who were identified as candidates for unreliability were inspected to see if these interviewers gave ranking incongruents with the admissions committee, thus providing ready identification of those interviewers who are reliable, and whose judgments are in accord with validity criteria. (MJM)